Im amused at the irony of ridiculing imperial but still happy to talk about brick courses. At least feet are the same vertically and horizontally, and don't change then they turn a corner!

7 courses is equal to 600mm. 86 might be the first course, but it's a rounding of mm. You shouldn't multiply this number to get your heights. Use 600/7.

31c is 2657.143mm but when you talk ceiling heights they also put a timber plate ontop of the brickwork. This takes it to 2692mm, and once they install plaster underneath - final height of 2682mm

To answer the question 31c ceilings are the equivalent of the old 'nine foot ceilings' where 28c is the standard 'eight foot ceilings' as I imagine that is what the op is referring to. The dimensions are a little off, but to your eye it's much of a muchness

When you're at the beach how high are the waves?When you are in an aircraft how is the pilot measuring his altitude?When you bought your last TV, LCD Monitor or phone what size were the screens?What size is the DPI on your printer?What size was the last pair of jeans you bought?When you last checked your tyres did you use PSI?How did you buy your last set of tyres without stating the rim size?

“The imperial system of measurement is antiquated and mostly irrelevant”I THINK NOT!! Well not for us old folk.

I think the OP may be elderly and some of the comments have scared her off.Don’t worry splash-back78 when we chose our builder they asked us if we wanted to upgrade to 9ft ceilings.

All builders we got quotes from were talking about heights in metres, not courses nor feet.However every single real estate ad I've seen for a house has been in feet; so I only have a feel for ceiling heights in feet, not in metres. Even though I'm well aware that imperial measures are a joke (and as an aside I'm yet to be find a way to bait an American with their desire to stay in the British Empire with their Imperial measurements).

All builders we got quotes from were talking about heights in metres, not courses nor feet.However every single real estate ad I've seen for a house has been in feet; so I only have a feel for ceiling heights in feet, not in metres. Even though I'm well aware that imperial measures are a joke (and as an aside I'm yet to be find a way to bait an American with their desire to stay in the British Empire with their Imperial measurements).

Yeah, all the builders/tradies that I've been dealing with have been talking about metres or millimetres, not feet and inches.

Real Estate are strange, 2000 sq m and above they talk about acres, below that they talk about square metres, such as 250sq m blocks at Yarrabilba. Houses they are all seemingly to be moving to how many square metres the house is, rather than the antiquated squares.

Love to dig the US though, not only do they persist with imperial, they have their own modified versions, such as the US Gallon and the like !

To answer grumblebum54, :-half a metre or metres highwhen the captain calls out to the cabin, he tells us we'll be flying at 10,000 metres.I have 125cm and 80cm LED TV's hereMy printers print what I want on A4 paperMy fat bum goes in to size 122you got me on the tyre pressures, 40psi front, 38psi rear, but I am going to have to use kpa as the old guages disappear.185/65/14 , as that's how the tyres are still branded, dunno why.

Never my intention to scare of the "elderly" OP, just having a bit of fun if you like.

The reason why there is still some usage of the old imperial measurements is the Resistance to Change (RC factor), because people just don't want to learn or move forward, and prefer to live in the past when it was so much easier.

One of the vagaries of brick courses, is how high is 31 courses with double height bricks ?

But really, should we simply ignore this old brick courses thing, and talk about ceiling heights instead? That seems a lot more relevant to a new home build, as that's what you want inside the house, in my case 2550mm ceilings. I don't care how many brick courses I need, that's up to the brickies to work out his requirements.

When you're at the beach how high are the waves?When you are in an aircraft how is the pilot measuring his altitude?When you bought your last TV, LCD Monitor or phone what size were the screens?What size is the DPI on your printer?What size was the last pair of jeans you bought?When you last checked your tyres did you use PSI?How did you buy your last set of tyres without stating the rim size?

None of which are related to the home construction process, hence my assertion that it is mostly irrelevant. Note that I took care to not say utterly?

The OP asked I question, which I answered in my free time under no obligation. An answer which was readily available on Google mind you. That's what we do on homeone, we pay it forward and help out. Although I guess the keypad warriors of the world would see to it that there is something deeper and more meaningful to be gained. Good work fighting the good fight.

grumblebum54

I think the OP may be elderly and some of the comments have scared her off.

Well if we are going to play deductions then let's look at the pattern of behaviour of the OP. In 22 posts they have only returned to provide a second comment on three occasions, this post included. One other thread had three posts. So an overwhelming majority of the time they ask a question, have it answered and leave it at that, which is totally fine.

I also note that they are building their first home. Though not impossible, I put to you that the likelihood of building for the first time in your old age is much lower than building in your youth to middle age. But I'm not about to make sweeping generalisations about all old timers, just as I will not speculate as to the age of someone I have never met. I simply reject your deduction of the events that transpired.

Please do not assume I am conducting some kind of assault of the silver haired members of the population. I genuinely wanted to help the OP which I why I bothered commenting in the first place. splash-back78, please do not be deterred by this banter. Go about your business and ignore the lot of us, including me.

Tristanium

7 courses is equal to 600mm. 86 might be the first course, but it's a rounding of mm. You shouldn't multiply this number to get your heights. Use 600/7.

We should also probably account for mortar height between each brick, which is of course variable dependent on who is laying the bricks. But is that level of detail really necessary? My fault for giving an answer in three decimal places. Or an answer at all as I am now realising.